Prime Minister's Office / Cabinet Office
Forensic assessment · v1.0.0 · updated 1 November 2026
Translation pending: the assessment text below is in English, the authoritative record.
- Response status
- Awaiting first reply
- Last contact
- 31 October 2026
- Next date on file
- None on file
- Earlier version
- Not yet assessed
Correspondence on file
since 1 September 2026
Our reading: Since September 2026, 2 emails are on file: 1 sent, 1 received (0 with content, 1 automatic acknowledgements). Most material: 31 October 2026, sent, request: Asks which government body should coordinate replies on the farm and BP Properties Ltd v Buckler (1987). Not delivered: the address bounced.
- Sentrequest
Asks which government body should coordinate replies on the farm and BP Properties Ltd v Buckler (1987). Not delivered: the address bounced.
1 automatic acknowledgement
Delivery failure: the Cabinet Office correspondence address could not be found, so the 31 Oct 2026 email was not delivered.
Not yet assessed
No forensic assessment has been written for this body yet. This page logs the correspondence on file so the first assessment can start from the record.
Case file
This file is built for a future reparations claim. Facts are as the records show them; interpretation is labelled “our reading”. Items marked “not checked” have not been compared with the original record.
(a) Conduct timeline
1 dated interactions, oldest first; 1 automatic acknowledgements are left out. Quotations are verbatim from the institution’s email; where the reply’s substance was an attachment, the email subject is quoted instead.
Show the timeline
| Date | Direction | Reference | Type | Verbatim |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 31 October 2026 | sent | — | request | Subject: Great House Farm / Tŷ Mawr, Llandough (BP Properties Ltd v Buckler, 1987) — which body should coordinate replies from several public bodies? |
(b) Inconsistencies and gaps
None found in the correspondence on file.
(c) Quarantined-name links
Records on the quarantine register (Kissed Frogs) that sit in, or came from, this institution’s holdings. None is treated as settled.
No quarantined-name record on the register is linked to this institution’s holdings.
(d) Duty and liability — our reading
Liability indicators (our reading): none
- Duty
- Freedom of Information Act 2000 s.1 and s.10 (confirm or deny, and supply held information within 20 working days); Environmental Information Regulations 2004 for land and environmental records; records management under the s.46 Code of Practice; Public Records Act 1958 selection and transfer for central government records.
- Indicators the duty was not met
- none found in the correspondence on file.
- Evidence still needed to confirm
- the institution’s retention schedule and disposal record for the series in question; the catalogue or file list it searched; any internal review or complaint outcome.
- Likely extent of exposure if confirmed
- An ICO decision notice or a records-management finding; any reparations claim would also need a link between a records failure and the loss.
(e) Evidence still needed
- Inspect the files it names, or their transferred copies at the archive. for paid visit list
Versions
| 1.0.0 | 2026-11-01 | First page: correspondence log. |